I made this argument to leeg before the competition started - it is on the same package as the CPU, but is connected with PCIe 3.0 x8 (over EMIB rather than the motherboard but still) and exclusively uses its own HBM rather than system memory. The only IGP-like thing about it is the shared power management.

Apparently it's allowed, and we get a lot of people with different hardware on /r/overclocking so we easily found a user willing to bench it competitively. As a result, however hard you OC no-one without Vega M will be able to touch our score for that stage. I think Skull Canyon NUCs start at $700 for the OC locked Vega M GL version (DDR4 SODIMMs sold separately), have fun.

Alternatively since afaik no-one has gone out and bought one for the comp I'd still totally support them being retroactively banned. We have to take advantage, if we don't someone else will, but it's not how I wanna win stages.

I know this may sound dumb but someone will always try to read between the lines. The Y-Cruncher bench has the CPU listed as "Use 4 Cores in Total". This would imply that you can use an 8 Core CPU BUT disable 4 of the Cores.

[Quote] I made this argument to leeg before the competition started - it is on the same package as the CPU, but is connected with PCIe 3.0 x8 (over EMIB rather than the motherboard but still) and exclusively uses its own HBM rather than system memory. The only IGP-like thing about it is the shared power management.
Apparently it's allowed, and we get a lot of people with different hardware on /r/overclocking so we easily found a user willing to bench it competitively. As a result, however hard you OC no-one without Vega M will be able to touch our score for that stage. I think Skull Canyon NUCs start at $700 for the OC locked Vega M GL version (DDR4 SODIMMs sold separately), have fun.
Alternatively since afaik no-one has gone out and bought one for the comp I'd still totally support them being retroactively banned. We have to take advantage, if we don't someone else will, but it's not how I wanna win stage[Quote]
only asking as I did not know if they are acceptable or not. Good going, I hope OCN can find a couple of users with the RX vega M. :thumb:.

It is listed at HWBOT as integrated GPU... so hence why it is allowed for this stage... but again Team Cup is not won in one stage

For the below, disabling cores has never been allowed, in contradiction to unlocking cores

21 hours ago, MaddMutt said:

I know this may sound dumb but someone will always try to read between the lines. The Y-Cruncher bench has the CPU listed as "Use 4 Cores in Total". This would imply that you can use an 8 Core CPU BUT disable 4 of the Cores.

What is going on with the links to the 3dmark Vantage submissions that have already been made by teams? I try to view submissions by clicking the overall score and it only says "There are no submissions." So far it seems to be the case for any team that has all 3 submissions. The permalink brings up a Bitly "page not found" message. Is it only me or is this the case for others trying to view it as well?

@Leeghoofd@richba5tard Any progress on this? I know for example that my 6.36 ghz 7350k r15 results of 711 (355.5 per core) is not being applied to our score while a 5.2 ghz 6700k r15 result of 1176 (294 per core) is. Hopefully this ranking is sorted by end of comp.

thats not the issue Leeg. we are two members who have submitted 7740 x results. meanwhile i have also submitted a 7350 score that per core is higher than all. but as the overall summary score is higher the per core score is not considered.

we just tested this in r/overclocking, @unityofsaintshad a low 7350k sub and @yosarianilives has our high one that is not counting, unity deleted his sub and so far no change, i believe perhaps it is specific to 7350k subs and the algorithm is not dividing the 7350k by 2 as it should as its a dual core CPU and thus its getting tossed out by anything that is a quad core or above?

The other possibility i notice is that this stage is taking into account for some reason the cpu architecture codenames perhaps as there is no sub with multiple scores in the top 3 with the same arch, exception being kabylake-s(7700k etc) and kabylake-x (7740x) this would also explain why both our team (r/overclocking) and MLG are encountering the issue as both of us have 7700k subs that beat out the 7350k sub

thats not the issue Leeg. we are two members who have submitted 7740 x results. meanwhile i have also submitted a 7350 score that per core is higher than all. but as the overall summary score is higher the per core score is not considered.

if u haven t tried: delete your 2 scores and resub the highest 7350, by retyping all the info. Do not use a previous sub info, which can m,ess up things around

now i have submitted a score of 623 on a dual core which is above jumpers 539 on a dual core and still my result is not taken.. ok atleast i have seen some change on the cb15 counting as otherwise jumpers would not have shown up. my sub is as per rules so one more issue?

I think its like i said a few days ago, most likely for some reason they have the stage set to only allow one sub per architecture code-name even though it does not state so in the rules. this is the only thing that i can think of that seems to fit what i see in every teams scores, everyones top 3 is some combination of 1x coffee lake, kabylake-S, kabylake-X and skylake, none ever have two kabylake-s subs counting even if they have a 2nd lower kabylake-s sub that will beat out a sub from one of the other architectures.